Synovus Bank v. Wells et al

Filing 15

ORDER STRIKING re 10 MOTION to Amend/Correct 3 Answer to Complaint, Counterclaim from the record. Signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis Howell on 07/31/2013. (thh)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
ASHEVILLE DIVISION
1:13cv125
SYNOVUS BANK,
Plaintiff,
v.
DAVID F. WELLS and
GREGORY A. RAXTER,

Defendants.
__________________________________

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER

Pending before the Court is the Motion to Amend [# 10]. On June 4, 2013,
Defendant David Wells filed his Answer to the Complaint. Defendant Raxter did
not file an answer. Plaintiff then moved the Court for the entry of default against
Defendant Raxter, which the Court entered on June 27, 2013. Defendants now
move for leave to amend the Answer pursuant to Rule 15(a)(2) of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure in order to add Defendant Gregory A. Raxter as a party to
the responsive pleading.
As a threshold matter, Defendants have failed to comply with the
requirements of the Local Rules, which require the filing of both a motion and a
brief. LCvR 7.1(C). Defendants have not filed a legal brief in support of their
motion. Accordingly, the Court STRIKES the motion [#10] from the record.

Moreover, the proper procedure for correcting the entry of default against a
defendant is to file a motion and supporting brief for the Court to set aside the
entry of default pursuant to Rule 55(c). Upon the filing of a proper motion and
supporting brief containing citations to relevant legal authority, and upon
Defendant Raxter demonstrating good cause for setting aside the entry of default,
the Court will consider whether setting aside the default is warranted in this case.
Defendant Raxter, however, must first comply with the requirements of both the
Local Rules and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Signed: July 31, 2013